Dark Darwin

If this isn’t the best thing Sailer has ever written, it’s right up there, close to the summit.

Darwin’s ascension in recent decades to his current role as the saint of secularism might raise obvious questions about liberal dogmas, such as the impossibility of hereditary differences having evolved among human races. But those seldom come up, because progressivism has evolved a bizarre yet apparently reassuring theodicy reminiscent of Zoroastrian dualism, in which Ahura Mazda represents all that is good and Angra Mainyu all that is bad. […] Similarly, Charles Darwin has come to epitomize everything that a proper progressive should believe, while Darwin’s younger half-cousin Francis Galton embodies crimethink.

The stream of thoughts and information that then flows from this initial insight is truly remarkable.

March 4, 2015admin 17 Comments »
FILED UNDER :History

TAGGED WITH : , , ,

17 Responses to this entry

  • neovictorian23 Says:

    Anything that gets people to read Paul Johnson, especially Modern Times, is to be recommended. The book is Darkly Enlightening.

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 4th, 2015 at 7:59 pm Reply | Quote
  • Dark Darwin | Reaction Times Says:

    […] Source: Outside In […]

    Posted on March 4th, 2015 at 8:09 pm Reply | Quote
  • E. Antony Gray (@RiverC) Says:

    A.C.Aveman approves.

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 4th, 2015 at 9:06 pm Reply | Quote
  • Karl "Madman" Mundt Says:

    Darwin saw the logic of dysgenics but, as a Manchester Liberal, could not countanence the means necessary to stop it. His son Leonard Darwin did though…

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    I thought the principal line of progressive criticism directed at Manchester Liberalism was on account of its (anti-dysgenic) Social Darwinism?

    [Reply]

    Karl "Madman" Mundt Reply:

    I meant the large interventions in private lives Galton and his school were entertaining would sit poorly with Darwin’s laissez faire outlook – if you don’t think the state should set corn prices you are not going to welcome lists of Approved Spouses. Ending all charity directed at the poor would not have pleased him either.

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 5th, 2015 at 11:38 am Reply | Quote
  • Hegemonizing Swarm Says:

    Darwinism for animals, Lysenkoism for people. If folk belief that ‘everyone is equal’ overrides science to the point that scientists careers are in danger if they report contrary results, that analogy is close enough.

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 5th, 2015 at 1:30 pm Reply | Quote
  • Deogolwulf Says:

    “. . . Lysenkoism for people.”

    A handy neologism for you: anthropolysenkoism.

    [Reply]

    E. Antony Gray (@RiverC) Reply:

    That ‘poly’ in the middle is a tongue-trap for sure

    [Reply]

    Erebus Reply:

    Epigenetics as anthropolysenkoism

    Excerpt:
    So, why all the fuss? Why the victorious girl rising from the ocean? It may well be that this topic resonates particularly well with Germans for historic reasons. After all, the idea that people’s properties — good or bad — are determined by their heritage, and thus ultimately by genes, formed the centrepiece of Nazi ideology (though the Nazis preferred the term ‘blood’ over ‘genes’ when talking about hereditary factors). A certain degree of German gene-angst is thus perhaps understandable. But, as noted above, the hype about epigenetics is by no means confined to Germany.

    Coarsely viewed, the contrast between nature (genetics) and nurture (epigenetics) mirrors the fault line of left vs. right in the political spectrum: the right believes that people are inherently good or bad, while the left believes in the power of the environment.

    I’d merely note that epigenetics isn’t all hype… but when people ascribe all sorts of inflated importance to it, they only make fools of themselves. Some people, as per the excerpt above, have various irrational or political motives for a bias towards a worldview wherein epigenetics are extremely important. Needless to say, that’s not good science.

    [Reply]

    Karl "Madman" Mundt Reply:

    ‘I’d merely note that epigenetics isn’t all hype… but when people ascribe all sorts of inflated importance to it, they only make fools of themselves.’

    Well, consider the current state of play in human evolutionary biology. The Left has seen so many of its favoured concepts & scientists go down and out:

    Out of Afica -> now modified multiregional hybridization.
    Race is a social construct -> automated sorting of genotypes into groupings that 19th C. anthropologists would be familiar with.
    Boas and Gould held in high esteem -> They were massive frauds.

    Of course they will inflate epigenetics. They don’t want a fighting retreat to turn into a rout.

    [Reply]

    Erebus Reply:

    Extremely insightful. You’re absolutely right, of course.

    Hegemonizing Swarm Reply:

    Nice one.

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 5th, 2015 at 2:21 pm Reply | Quote
  • Deogolwulf Says:

    @

    I’d say more a happy eye-trap. The tongue should not treat it as a “poly”: anthROPolySENKoism.

    [Reply]

    E. Antony Gray (@RiverC) Reply:

    Evidently some people here don’t have tongues coming out of their eyeballs. Carry on!

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 5th, 2015 at 3:17 pm Reply | Quote
  • Rasputin Says:

    So, are NRxers Thals or Melons?

    http://www.koanicsoul.com/blog/2012/09/01/paleo-phrenology-and-the-new-face-ism/

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 5th, 2015 at 11:50 pm Reply | Quote
  • This Week in Reaction (2015/03/06) | The Reactivity Place Says:

    […] on The Trouble with Entropy and how modern Shibboleths are directly fostering it. Land also points to one of Sailer’s very best—on Darwin and Galton and, as is almost always the case, so […]

    Posted on June 17th, 2015 at 3:38 pm Reply | Quote

Leave a comment